Anyone have any experience with 2nd gen MR2s?
06-02-2009, 11:44 PM
#1
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seabrook, TX
Posts: 2,417
Total Cats: 20
Anyone have any experience with 2nd gen MR2s?
I am thinking about getting a 2nd gen MR2 and wanted to know what everyone thought of them. I tried searching for a forum for them, but none of them are even close to being organized or well run. I know the weight split is F46/R54 and the turbo motor can handle a lot of power, especially the 94+ jdm motor. Yes JDM motor!
What is bad about these cars? What is good?
What is bad about these cars? What is good?
Reply
0
0
06-02-2009, 11:49 PM
#2
There are quite a bunch of them in my town. The turbo guys are either running the stocker or a big 20g and making decent 300ish whp. There are a few that have the lexus v6 swap since its one of the easiest swaps for that car. Power similar to stock (turbo) but its EVERYWHERE and torque is quite nice. As far as problems I dont know much.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 08:57 AM
#3
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seabrook, TX
Posts: 2,417
Total Cats: 20
I think if I do, I will stay with the turbo route, as the V6 will add a little more weight to the back. With a split like it already has, I don't want to offset it anymore than it already is. I love how when Yamaha and Toyota build an engine together, they overbuild it so much. My buddies IS300 can handle crazy amounts of power on the stock block.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 10:09 AM
#6
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
V6? what V6?
Get the 2.2L 5SFE and hang a turbo off it. you pay less for a stroker basically. I forget if the 3SGTE turbo manifold will bolt up or not. but a head swap is not out of the question!
Get the 2.2L 5SFE and hang a turbo off it. you pay less for a stroker basically. I forget if the 3SGTE turbo manifold will bolt up or not. but a head swap is not out of the question!
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 10:34 AM
#7
1992 toyota mr2
1991 Toyota MR2
Frank
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 10:39 AM
#8
2 Props,3 Dildos,& 1 Cat
iTrader: (8)
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Fake Virginia
Posts: 19,338
Total Cats: 573
A couple in NOVA for under $3K craigslist. You need another toy.
1992 toyota mr2
1991 Toyota MR2
Frank
1992 toyota mr2
1991 Toyota MR2
Frank
plus my next car will have four doors.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 10:41 AM
#9
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seabrook, TX
Posts: 2,417
Total Cats: 20
The problem that the 2.2L engine isn't capable of handling 275-300hp like the JDM 3sgte can. The internals of the 3sgte are already very stout and when you get one, 80% of the time it comes with a lsd as well. The ECU is also more programable and more cost effective than going full stand alone.
There is a company that takes the stock turbo and rebuilds it, machines it for bigger turbine and compressor wheels, gives you a bigger fuel pump, higher flowing fuel rail, and a reprogrammed ECU for 1500. Not too bad when you don't have to tune it at all and it going to be very reliable.
The V6 is out of the camry. Pretty much just goes right in.
There is a company that takes the stock turbo and rebuilds it, machines it for bigger turbine and compressor wheels, gives you a bigger fuel pump, higher flowing fuel rail, and a reprogrammed ECU for 1500. Not too bad when you don't have to tune it at all and it going to be very reliable.
The V6 is out of the camry. Pretty much just goes right in.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 10:45 AM
#10
Elite Member
Thread Starter
iTrader: (41)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Seabrook, TX
Posts: 2,417
Total Cats: 20
A couple in NOVA for under $3K craigslist. You need another toy.
1992 toyota mr2
1991 Toyota MR2
Frank
1992 toyota mr2
1991 Toyota MR2
Frank
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 11:04 AM
#11
If you need another toy then I need about 5 more LOL.
My mom got a 3rd gen after passing the Miata down to me...and loved it.
I took it for a few VERY spirited drives expecting snap oversteer and never found it. Insanely fun on the right roads (err track I mean), and decent aftermarket support.
Have fun!
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 12:45 PM
#12
I had a '91 with a Gen 3 3SGTE with bolt ons, cams, built bottom end, boost controller, water injection, and an intercooler upgrade. It ended up making 310whp on the stock turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 01:05 PM
#13
I had a '91 with a Gen 3 3SGTE with bolt ons, cams, built bottom end, boost controller, water injection, and an intercooler upgrade. It ended up making 310whp on the stock turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
Last edited by mrtonyg; 06-03-2009 at 01:42 PM.
Reply
0
0
06-03-2009, 01:33 PM
#14
Elite Member
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Concord, North Carolina
Posts: 4,160
Total Cats: 6
I had a '91 with a Gen 3 3SGTE with bolt ons, cams, built bottom end, boost controller, water injection, and an intercooler upgrade. It ended up making 310whp on the stock turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
I liked it for a GT car, but for an all around daily/track car I didn't like it.
The car is pretty heavy for its size, the turbo car is ~3000lbs trimmed out.
The suspensions is archaic, it's basically the Camry front suspension, with a cheap multilink in the rear. The snap oversteer everyone talks about is typical of any mid engine car. I never had any issues with it because I knew how to drive it. As long as you don't lift or brake mid turn it won't snap it's pretty easy. The 93+ had a revised toe link that made the car a little more docile.
The suspension was okay if the track was smooth, anything less than smooth would mark the car very unsettled.
The car could really put the power down, it was especially fun in the rain.
You're tire size is pretty limited without cutting on the body, you can't get much over a 215 in the front and a 255 in the rear.
Parts are pretty expensive, and I think pretty limited.
The forums I used to read are full of closeminded and arrogent people who are unwilling to change their way of thinking even when confronted with evidence. As well as people who worship the advice of a few "experts" and attack all who dare to challange them.
In the end I got rid of it because it felt heavy, and the suspension really limited the car. The turbo motor never felt right, a stand alone might have fixed it, but the stock ecu was inadequate. When everything was working right it was a fast car that was lots of fun.
But if I had it all to do over again I would have done the Lexus 3.5l V6 swap instead of the turbo motor. I would have made as much power NA as I was making turbo.
From my experiences with them and being around/in the community...that sounds just about perfect...lol.
Reply
0
0
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
elesjuan
Build Threads
9
11-14-2018 12:18 PM
SuperSneakySecretSquirrel
Meet and Greet
5
09-06-2015 08:30 PM
